Posted on 12/03/2010 4:39:40 AM PST by Colonel Kangaroo
Event marks war's anniversary
CHARLESTON -- The shots are solely verbal -- and expected to remain that way -- but at least one Civil War Sesquicentennial event is triggering conflict.
The Sons of Confederate Veterans plan to hold a $100-per-person "Secession Ball" on Dec. 20 in Gaillard Municipal Auditorium. It will feature a play highlighting key moments from the signing of South Carolina's Ordinance of Secession 150 years ago, an act that severed the state's ties to the Union and put the nation on the path to the Civil War.
Jeff Antley, who is organizing the event, said the Secession Ball honors the men who stood up for their rights.
"To say that we are commemorating and celebrating the signers of the ordinance and the act of South Carolina going that route is an accurate statement," Antley said. "The secession movement in South Carolina was a demonstration of freedom."
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People plans to protest the event, said Charleston branch President Dot Scott. She deferred further comment to Lonnie Randolph, president of the state NAACP.
"It's amazing to me how history can be rewritten to be what you wanted it to be rather than what happened," Randolph said. "You couldn't pay the folks in Charleston to hold a Holocaust gala, could you? But you know, these are nothing but black people, so nobody pays them any attention."
When Southerners refer to states' rights, he said, "they are really talking about their idea of one right -- to buy and sell human beings."
Antley said that's not so.
"It has nothing to do with slavery as far as I'm concerned," he said. "What I'm doing is honoring the men from this state who stood up for their self-government and their rights under law -- the right to secede was understood."
Antley said, "Slavery is an abomination, but slavery is not just a Southern problem. It's an American problem. To lay the fault and the institution of slavery on the South is just ignorance of history."
Antley said about 500 people are expected to attend the ball, which begins with a 45-minute play and concludes with a dinner and dancing. S.C. Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, an ardent Civil War re-enactor, is among the actors in the play. The actual ordinance of secession document also will be on display.
Randolph said the state NAACP is consulting with its national office in Baltimore regarding the format of the protests, which also could extend to other 150th anniversary events. "There is not one event that's off the table," he said.
Asked whether there could be good Sesquicentennial events, Randolph said, "If there were a dialogue to sit down and discuss that event 150 years ago and how it still negatively impacts the lives of so many people in this state and around the country, that would be a good discussion, but not an event to sit down and tell lies about what happened and glamorize those people who thought America was so sorry and so bad that they wanted to blow it to hell. That's what they did -- that's what they attempted to do, and we want to make that honorable?"
Charleston is receiving increased national attention as the nation's plans for the Sesquicentennial move forward. This was where it began, with the state becoming the first to secede on Dec. 20, 1860, and firing the first shot on April 12, 1861.
Most of the Lowcountry's Sesquicentennial events have been announced with little controversy -- many involve lectures by respected historians and scholars.
In its vision statement for the observance, the National Park Service said it "will address the institution of slavery as the principal cause of the Civil War, as well as the transition from slavery to freedom -- after the war -- for the 4 million previously enslaved African Americans."
Michael Allen of the National Park Service said he is aware of plans for the Secession Ball but noted that most Sesquicentennial events have found common ground among those with differing viewpoints.
"Now some people might be upset with some pieces of the pie. I understand that," he said. "I think that's the growth of me, as a person of African decent, is to realize that people view this in different ways."
Allen said other Sesquicentennial commemorations being planned will mark events that have a strong black history component, such as Robert Smalls' theft of the Confederate ship Planter and the 54th Massachusetts' assault on Battery Wagener.
"At least what's being pulled together by various groups, be they black or white or whatever, will at least be more broad based and diverse than what was done in 1961," Allen said. "Hopefully, at the end of the day, all Carolinians can benefit from this four-year journey."
Tom O'Rourke, director of the Charleston County Park and Recreation Commission, said Sesquicentennial organizers were fooling themselves if they thought the Confederate side of the story was going to be buried in the observances.
"I think there will be controversy, I think there will be hurt feelings, and I think that as this anniversary passes, we will question what else we could have done to tell the whole story," he said. "But I am OK with all of that. ... I think all discussion is progress."
Read more: http://www.thesunnews.com/2010/12/03/1847335/secession-ball-stirs-controversy.html#ixzz1737LSVRv
Cut and paste error on my part — the italicized portion of my post is from Wikipedia. I meant to cite them as my source, but dropped part of what I had typed.
The Confederate democrats (and then later the Progressive democrats) used the KKK as a terrorist organization no differently than how Islamo fascists use terrorist today or how Hitler used terrorism or Japan did, etc….
I never made any reference to the geographical location of the democrat party’s use of the KKK or terrorism. The democrats have a long history of fascism and of the use of terrorism starting with the Confederate democrats all the way up to today.
Sometimes I would agree with you, especially when you run into a government educated Yankee.
BTW, what regiment was your ancestor(s) in? Mine were in the 29th & 37th VA Infantry and the 1st VA Militia, joining in March and May of ‘62.
When the southern states seceded they walked away from their responsibility for their share of the national debt, repudiated responsibility for national obligations, and took every piece of government property they could get their hands on. How are those actions designed to KEEP THINGS LIKE THE CIVIL WAR FROM HAPPENING?
You are ignoring the part of the 10th that delegates powers to the United States. How could the 10th be used as an argument for secession since it only states that the states retain powers not delegated to the US? How do you justify using this amendment to usurp these delegated powers from the United States?
Busy day.
Do you honestly believe that people in the South in 1860 felt that way? If so, I'd love to see some quotes from the period supporting that.
...but had everything to gain or lose if the States lost their rights as soverign entities.
Who was advocating an end to their rights a sovereign entities? Again, some quotes please.
Men don’t fight and die for that which doesn’t concern them, so why did the average Southerner fight.
They had a lot more interest in slavery than you're apparently willing to admit.
I’ve been told I had relatives on my mothers side that enlisted in Lynchburg so I assume they were in the 28th. I know they were in the Army of Northern Va.
Wow, you got some seriously warped understanding of history there.
Agreed that the Democrats used the Klan as a terrorist organization. No problems there.
Going to have to point out that Islam is a little different in that Muslims don’t “use” terrorists so much as they use terrorist methods. There’s a difference is that there is no such thing as a peaceful devout Muslim.
Agreed that Hitler and Tojo used terror as a part of their regime, but must again point out that those regimes had the complete subjegation of all races and peoples as their goal. The Klan only had the subjegation of the black race as it’s goal, which while evil does not really qualify as fascist.
Finally, while I agree that some Democrats have used terrorism in the past, stating that it began in the Confederate States (let’s just say it, the South) ignores the problems that were inherant in the Democratic party long before the 1860 election.
Ancient Greece prior to the Macedonian invasion.
On the other hand, powers which are not explicitly granted to the United States (and secession would be an example of a right that is not explicitly discussed in the Constitution) are reserved to the states.
Therefore, if a state wishes to secede, there is no power granted to the United States to stop that action.
The idea was that if a difference of opinion came to a head, the two sides would part ways and avoid the bloodshed of a war. Which is worse, the southern States seceeding and walking away from their responsibility for their share of the national debt, repudiating responsibility for national obligations, and taking every piece of government property they could get their hands on or the north’s actions in starting a war that would kill over a half million people?
It was the South that started the war and is responsible for the deaths of all those people, as well as all the destruction that befell them.
Could you put all of your talking points into one post and save us the time.
Your logic makes no sense. You are trying to claim that the 10th Amendment can be used to destroy the 10th Amendment. You admit that the 10th delegates powers to the United States but then go on to claim that is also allows States to usurp that power. That is pure BS.
Honestly, I do believe that most people in the South during the 1860’s didn’t care one way or another about the overall issue of slavery. Seriously, why do you think they did? The vast majority were not slave owners, so why would they care one way or another about it? You’re so ready to think that the South was all for slavery, how about proving your assertion that the average southerner cared about slavery. I don’t want to see quotes from Generals or politicans, show me quotes from normal, run of the mill southerners.
Umm, no. The south tried to seceed and SC only attacked Ft. Sumpter after Lincoln started calling for troops to march on South Carolina. Lincoln bungled a dangerous situation and started a war.
It's so much fun responding to Southron BS one post at a time.
The South was nothing more a racist state dedicated to keeping other Americans in slavery. When slavery was overturned, they dedicated their life to keeping other Americans in the back of the bus. They didn’t like the results of an election so they waged war aganist it. They can (keep)saying that it was because of state sovereignty but all they had to due was to guarantee civil rights to other Americans whom they said were citizens. But, of course, if they did that, there was just no way those black Americans would vote for their agenda (and the Democrat Party), and that what is was all about. But, they didn’t want blacks to have those rights, so the revolted. The majority of the leaders and military commanders including Robert E. Lee knowingly fought for slavery to be maintained.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_did_General_Robert_E_Lee_feel_about_slavery
Listen. One last time. Here’s the actual text of the 10th Amendment.
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
The right to seceed is not delegated to the United States by the Constitution. It’s not prohibited by the Constitution either, so by the very text of the 10th Amendment, that right is reserved “to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.